New degrowth paper is way off on electric trucks.…
ht @ErikwimDuring

Paper claims eTrucks with range of 800 km need batteries heavier than the allowed weight for truck+load in the EU today.

That's ~10x too much.

Quick takedown thread.
Here's the quote I'm reacting to.
(I've not dissected the rest of the paper.)

Let me calculate for you why this is bollox.
How big is a battery for 800km?

I had a couple of master students study the issue and we concluded that with aero fairings and low rolling resistance tires, the average energy use per km would be close to 1.3 kWh/km.

So 800 km range means around 1 MWh battery.
Right now, cells are about 260 Wh/kg.
Experts expect 400 Wh/kg in 2025.…

Add 30% weight for the battery pack =>
~300 Wh/kg =>
0.0003 MWh/kg.

So 1 MWh weights 1/0.0003=3333 kg.

That's >10x less than the paper claims!
The theoretical maximum energy density of lithium air batteries is over 10 kWh/kg: 10x lighter still.

Combine it with a 3x more efficient electric motor and its lighter than gasoline/km.

That's not happening anytime soon but it shows you the 2025 value is far from outlandish.
As we showed in a recent paper, the drivetrain of an electric vehicle can be about 3000 kg lighter.

That means:
Of course we are not there yet so I'm glad the the EU added an allowance of 2000 kg to zero emission trucks.

By the way: trucks are usually volume constrained (the container is full) and not weight constrained (the container is too heavy) which is why hydrogen has a problem.
Before I wrap up: I agree with the writers that we should limit our resource use and that our amount of travel and how we travel is wasteful.

But I am sick and tired of degrowth proponents that bend the facts in order for their dogma to become truth. That doesn't solve anything.
Conclusion: well designed modern low emission heavy eTrucks with 800 km of range are less than 2 tonnes (5%) heavier than diesel equivalents.

They will become LIGHTER around 2025-2030.

Don't let any degrowth proponent using heavily outdated literature tell you otherwise.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with AukeHoekstra

AukeHoekstra Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AukeHoekstra

26 Sep
In the Netherlands there is much ado about a new ENCO study showing NUCLEAR is cheap. It apparently convinced more than half of parliament. But it is riddled with errors and was rushed through without any check. If the errors are corrected the conclusion reverses. (short thread)
The same ministry (@MinisterieEZK) commissioned a peer reviewed study earlier this year (by Kalavasta) that showed nuclear is more expensive.

Why did they commission this new non-peer reviewed study from a group that is mainly doing nuclear security studies?
Fortunately the writers of the Kalavasta study already reacted to the new pro-nuclear ENCO study. They point out the main problems with the new study that are glaringly obvious for most experts.

Let me summarise in this thread.…
Read 17 tweets
19 Sep
I read it more frequently recently:
bike riding emits more CO2 than an electric car.

And it's true, kind of.
But not really.

If you include the fact that humans have to live an preferably move anyway it becomes untrue. (Short thread.)
First of all, @Mike_Page is right that electric motors are actually more efficient at turning calories into motion than humans. So if we would replace heavy electric trucks with an army of cyclists, this would indeed not be good for the climate and require too much food.
Second of all, I think it's probably true when you compare an electric bike to a car but the 30g/km for a vegan like me is clearly less than for an electric car (~50g/km for manufacturing plus ~40g/km for driving in the EU) and you have to add my CO2 emissions as car driver.
Read 5 tweets
19 Sep
'New diesel makes the air cleaner' Dutch newspaper @lc_nl shouts.

It's an often repeated irrelevant half truth:

1) 'Clean diesel' emits just as much CO2 and is thus just as 'dirty' for the climate.

2) It's only true for the latest heavy trucks on dirty roads. Not for cars.
And yes we could make diesel cars that emit very few monitored particulates too.

But diesels still emit unmonitored dangerous stuff (like ozone and brake pad dust) and making normal cars 'clean' means they become more expensive and less user friendly.
The #dieselgate scandal stems from the fact that making a 'clean diesel' affordable and user friendly (e.g. no disposing off the contents of and then refilling your adblue tank all the time) was deemed impossible: 'clean' heavy diesel trucks do not imply 'clean' diesel cars.
Read 6 tweets
12 Sep
I'm on record as being a fan of in airborne wind energy (#AWE).

It can reach more powerful wind at higher altitudes.
And there's less:
materials (5-10x less)
visual impact

So I'm sorry to see Makani had to quit, BUT...
In no way does this mean the end of #AWE. Makani was just one concept of one company. There are many other players and approaches. I've always been partial to solutions with a generator on the ground. So not Makani but e.g. @AmpyxPower or @_Kitepower.… ImageImageImage
For me the whole concept of putting up a tower to reach high altitude wind seems heavy handed and wasteful in terms of needed resources compared to letting up a kite on a string (here a graph of average wind power vs altitude from my Dutch book from 2010)… Image
Read 7 tweets
12 Sep
Today I want to do a thread about a hugely important report: the @WWF's


I'll also explain why this report makes me want to redouble my efforts to accelerate the switch to electric vehicles and renewable energy.…
Many followers know I devote my life to accelerating the adoption of renewable energy and electric vehicles.

But I actually don't do that because I like electric cars, wind turbines or solar cells.

So why?

I want everybody to thrive and be happy and to avoid suffering.

That means that ALL humans have access to food, shelter, healthcare and safety which they can enjoy in relative freedom.

EVERYbody also means: animals can thrive, without being tortured to become our food.
Read 23 tweets
3 Sep
When I wrote my first book about electric vehicles in 2008, fast charging was still non-existent.

In 2012/2013, companies like @Tesla and @Fastned started rolling out the first 50 kW fast chargers.

And now 300/350 kW chargers are being built.
We are witnessing a revolution!
To be clear: Epyon (a Dutch company later bought by ABB) was already trying to sell fast chargers and Posicharge was selling them to big warehouses. But there were no networks and affordable batteries could not charge that fast. (As I also describe in the book.)
And in the book I calculate that rolling out a barebones fast charging network over the Netherlands would cost around 100 million Euros. Which is actually really cheap for what you get. So it was a fan back then already!
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!